- 20 -
regard to any binding effect of the SBOE decision, to make
findings essentially identical to those of the SBOE to the extent
relevant to the result we reach here, we conclude that it is
unnecessary to probe the applicability of collateral estoppel.
To further explain, petitioner at trial, in support of its
position, offered only a single documentary exhibit and the
testimony of three witness. The document was a copy of the
school’s articles of incorporation, identical in every material
respect to multiple copies already contained in the
administrative record. The witnesses were a teacher who worked
at the school for a year, a part-time teacher’s aide who assisted
at the school for 2 or 3 months, and Ms. Fennell. Neither of the
former two could recall the specific time period during which
they were associated with petitioner. Most critically, the
testimony proffered by all three was generalized, conclusory, and
patently insufficient to cast any serious doubt on the details
regarding particular transactions and events evinced by the
administrative record.
For example, the testimony elicited on direct examination
from the teacher regarding issues such as private benefit
consisted of the following:
Q Okay. Are you aware whether, or did you see
as a teacher her [Ms. Fennell] participating in any
board meetings or anything while you were there?
A Yes. There were board meetings. We had,
like, I think there were two or three board meetings.
Page: Previous 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007